Home

i find this strong ... could be interesting if you took off the highlight and defined the shape of the pawn more ...althou i could be wrong ... but love it

why do you use a pawn? are you saying soldiers are pawns?

...they are definitely not kings!

makes a powerful statement .... and why not use a pawn ?**

i guess some people see pawns as just grunts, people who do the dirty work for someone else and are not appreciated. I guess if you are going to market this to soldiers, they may not like that characterization, because some soldiers are proud of being a soldier. I'm not pro-soldier or anti-soldier, but I can imagine some soldiers may be offended.

pawns represent the rank and file so the graphic is very appropriate here. pawns are underrated and deserve much more respect. absolutely nothing wrong with being a pawn or rant and file soldier. in the long run they are the most powerful part of any military. I think this is great!

Pawn is totally the wrong message. In modern vernacular the word carries a negative connotation as the dispensable front line.

I guess I've just never considered pawns as negative in chess or war. my bad.

Hmmm i think going by the metaphor and ideology its used in the right context, represents the hierachy as theartist said. The game of chess has always been assosciated with strategy and war which makes it a good concept in my mind, and a bishop, rook, knight, queen or king would not convey the same meaning ... *And im sure a chess player would not call his pawn - dispensible ...every piece has his part .

%22And im sure a chess player would not call his pawn - dispensible ...every piece has his*(or her)* part .%22... as an avid chess player, that statement is very true.. the objective of any chess game is to win.. and in order to do so a queen can be just as %22dispensible%22 as a pawn...**i also like bullfighting... and tuesdays.

Which is why I said %22in modern vernacular%22 and I did not say %22in chess%22. Although, even that context gives pause to this concept as Webster's says:**1 : one of the chessmen of least value having the power to move only forward ordinarily one square at a time, to capture only diagonally forward, and to be promoted to any piece except a king upon reaching the eighth rank*2 : one that can be used to further the purposes of another*

i still would have to respectfully disagree. when you are graduating from school, you are graduating on the assumption that you are a better person, a stronger person then when you started. with your mark, it looks as if you graduate as a pawn, the lowest rank. and if you check wikipedia or dictionary.com, pawn is described as someone of the lowest rank who is manipulated for someone else's personal gain.**

%5E George, true but think about it though, when you graduate your still fresh like a pawn, you evolve into a queen or king? huh? maybe I'm a terrible chess player, a good bull fighter and love fridays.

Either way, if you are a soldier OR a soldier graduate...do you want to be associated with being a pawn. Although most days, I do indeed feel like a pawn.

P.S. at all: I simply LOVE healthy debate so just tell me when to shut up. But I won't.

never seen a KING soldier maybe a knight. Gotta start somewhere %23fight

i feel like a king prawn!...

i don't know, if you start school as a pawn, and you finish as a pawn, then you didn't go anywhere and you wasted all those years, and man, your parents won't be too happy.

you start school as, well, a nobody. to be a pawn you have to be trained. but in this case a soldier is always a soldier. with a degree or not. my military friends and family would concur.

if we are using only chess pieces as our reference, then the lowest piece is the pawn. so in essence, a nobody is a pawn here, nothing else you could show as any lower ... maybe a checkers piece?

actually, considering how few pieces overall are on a chess board, I would say even the pawns are an elite force. I mean before they were pawns they were wood dowels....

gyui said: i don't know, if you start school as a pawn, and you finish as a pawn.**You start as a soldier, and you finish as a soldier with a graduation hat :)

This was probably the most minimalist way of portraying a soldier without the ammunition and stuff. I strongly condemn opinions degrading soldiers as I personally have immense respect for the protectors. Inspite of being the lowest rank they make the highest order of sacrifice and i wouldnt do anything offensive even if am paid with bags of gold... Its just a way of portrayal and nothing else.

Nobody is questioning your motive. Rather the appropriateness of your solution. As you can see, folks come down on both sides. I still feel, in today's vernacular, nobody wants to be associated with being a pawn. And you're a better man than me, I'm offensive for FREE, much more so if someone offered me bags of gold.

Like logoboom said, we are not saying you intentionally are trying to insult soldiers. I immediately think of some negative connotations when I hear pawn like %22Pawn shop%22 %22Pawn my work onto someone else%22 %22pawn in this little game%22 etc. I'm sure someone will come up with a positive usage for pawn, but some synonyms for pawn on thesaurus.com are creature, dupe, instrument, mark, patsy, pigeon, puppet, stooge, sucker, tool, toy, victim. **All I'm saying is that the logo has some iffy points, and it is something that needs to be considered. why does it have to be the lowest chess piece, why not have a king with a graduation cap? Graduating is for some the greatest moment in their lives, and i'm sure they don't feel like pawns, but more like kings.

CD?

%5Ehow rude!...

It _is_ a very nice concept, but I too think that the 'pawn' connotation is very strong one and completely dwarfs the 'solder' reference. **If you are set on using a pawn, then have you considered trying to play off the idea of a pawn turning into a king ?

Dbunk, I mentioned above that why even go with a pawn, why not try a king, or like epsilon stated, the evolution of a pawn to a king? Good luck dbunk, it's a good concept.

Thank you so much for your constructive thoughts, but am not convinced to use a king to represent a soldier or evolve a soldier to a king, sounds deliberate to me. i'd rather use something like military labels to depict it. anyways what do u guys think of this one **http://logopond.com/gallery/detail/58858

@ Nido: i didnt intend to be rude, was just opinionating.

@dbunk: nido wasn't saying you were rude, he was actually making fun of logoboom. no worries :)**hope you find a solution to your logo dbunk.

Yea gyui, am jus keepin this aside for now. Designed it for a contest i didnt thro... for obvious reasons i guess. will rework on this sometime later.

such a controvese idea! i totally get the use of a pawn, they do in chess what soldiers do in wars, i guess it's just the inconvenience of the name that's creatin all the drama :p

@hitbyreindeer: U read my mind %5Bthey do in chess what soldiers do in wars%5D, I didnt expect the controversy either :p*Opinions differ :)

I'm a soldier, actually (I'm even a grunt/infantry). First thing I thought of was that you have used a pawn to represent soldiers. Pawns in chess are the least valuable pieces, obviously. Used to deter other moves and ultimately expendable. When chess was invented I'm sure these pieces were much more applicable (King, Queen, Bishop, etc...) but today, especially in the US, the image of a pawn is nothing but a negative connotation.

At first glance, I felt it could be a bit misleading. If your objective is to appeal to the majority of people, possibly try finding a creative solution by using the outline of a pawn and putting a higher ranked piece within the pawn outline? If executed properly, I'd think it'd show that no matter what rank a person may be, everyone has the potential to be something greater no matter where they may be coming from. Just thinking out loud here. (:

I think regardless of positive or negative connotation at the end of the day, the grunt/ soldier, as respected as they should be ARE the pawns of any war, they ARE the 'expendable' pieces deployed ad nausem to conquer whatever territory or object is placed before them by the 'king, queen, bishops, knights rooks etc or sent to be a distraction while and end around is made etc. talk to any vet from Hamburger hill and ask them if they would not consider themselves pawns. Hell the word Grunt, which is completely acceptable and used in the army today practically means the same thing.


That said its my belief is this logo works as intended, if you do not have a degree then you are at a starting point and have yet to better yourself, after you graduate then yes you may no longer be a pawn, but that's after the fact.

As a graphic designer and former military member, I think the Pawn was the wrong choice. I think this whole conversation could have been avoided by the use of the Knight instead of the pawn.

Much of the reasoning above about the pawn being the right choice all makes sense, but you have to look at this from a general perspective and what feelings one will get during the first few seconds of seeing the logo. For me, it was a negative one. In today's culture, the word pawn carries too many negative associations. One can make the argument about the benefits of the pawn, but the negative will generally trump the positive with that imagery.

What about a knight?